ArticleThe Journal of biological chemistry2015
Non-germ Line Restoration of Genomic Imprinting for a Small Subset of Imprinted Genes in Ubiquitin-like PHD and RING Finger Domain-Containing 1 (Uhrf1) Null Mouse Embryonic Stem Cells.
Article in The Journal of biological chemistry, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metabolic imprinting in trophoblast barrier dysfunction: the role of glucolipotoxicity, endoplasmic reticulum stress, and amino acid transport imbalance.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Association of UHRF1 gene polymorphisms with oligospermia in Chinese males.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2019Article
- Loss of DNA methylation in zebrafish embryos activates retrotransposons to trigger antiviral signaling.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2017Article
- Widespread recovery of methylation at gametic imprints in hypomethylated mouse stem cells following rescue with DNMT3A2.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The underlying mechanism for the establishment and maintenance of differential DNA methylation in imprinted genes is largely unknown. Previous studies using Dnmt1 knock-out embryonic stem (ES) cells demonstrated that, although re-expression of DNMT1 restored DNA methylation in the non-imprinted regions, the methylation patterns of imprinted genes could be restored only through germ line passage. Knock-out of Uhrf1, an accessory factor essential for DNMT1-mediated DNA methylation, in mouse ES cells also led to impaired global DNA methylation and loss of genomic imprinting. Here, we demonstrate that, although re-expression of UHRF1 in Uhrf1(-/-) ES cells restored DNA methylation for the bulk genome but not for most of the imprinted genes, it did rescue DNA methylation for the imprinted H19, Nnat, and Dlk1 genes. Analysis of histone modifications at the differential methylated regions of the imprinted genes by ChIP assays revealed that for the imprinted genes whose DNA methylation could be restored upon re-expression of UHRF1, the active histone markers (especially H3K4me3) were maintained at considerably low levels, and low levels were maintained even in Uhrf1(-/-) ES cells. In contrast, for the imprinted genes whose DNA methylation could not be restored upon UHRF1 re-expression, the active histone markers (especially H3K4me3) were relatively high and became even higher in Uhrf1(-/-) ES cells. Our study thus supports a role for histone modifications in determining the establishment of imprinting-related DNA methylation and demonstrates that mouse ES cells can be a valuable model for mechanistic study of the establishment and maintenance of differential DNA methylation in imprinted genes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.